Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33989440›Full record

ReviewReviews in medical virology2022

A rapid review of measures to support people in isolation or quarantine during the Covid-19 pandemic and the effectiveness of such measures.

Karen Cardwell, Sinéad M O'Neill, Barrie Tyner, Natasha Broderick, Kirsty O'Brien, Susan M Smith, Patricia Harrington, Mairin Ryan, Michelle O'Neill

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reviews in medical virology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Factors That Affect the COVID-19 Pandemic in Summer 2022 Compared to Summer 2021.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Karen CardwellHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin 7, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5909-7439
Sinéad M O'NeillHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin 7, Ireland.
Barrie TynerHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin 7, Ireland.
Natasha BroderickHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin 7, Ireland.
Kirsty O'BrienHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin 7, Ireland.
Susan M SmithDepartment of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Patricia HarringtonHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin 7, Ireland.
Mairin RyanHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin 7, Ireland.
Michelle O'NeillHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin 7, Ireland.
Health and Safety Authority · IERoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IETrinity College Dublin · IE

Funding

Health Research Board HRB-CICER-2016-1871
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This rapid review aimed to identify measures available to support those in isolation or quarantine during the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic, and determine their effectiveness in improving adherence to these recommendations and or reducing transmission. The rapid review consisted of two elements, the first was a review of guidance published by national and international agencies relating to measures to support those in isolation (due to case status) or quarantine (due to close contact status) during the Covid-19 pandemic. Five categories of support measures were identified in the international guidance, they were: Psychological, addiction and safety supports, Essential supplies, Financial aid, Information provision and Enforcement. The second element was a rapid literature review of the effectiveness of measures used to support individuals in isolation or quarantine during any pandemic or epidemic setting, due to respiratory pathogens. A systematic search of published peer-reviewed articles and nonpeer-reviewed pre-prints was undertaken from 1 January 2000 to 26 January 2021. Two Australian publications met the inclusion criteria, both based on data from a survey undertaken during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. The first reported that 55% of households were fully compliant with quarantine recommendations, and that there was increased compliance reported in households that understood what they were meant to do compared with those who reported that they did not (odds ratio [OR]: 2.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.35-3.80). The second reported that access to paid sick and or carer's leave did not predict compliance with quarantine recommendations (OR: 2.07, 95% CI: 0.82-5.23). Neither reported on reduction in transmission.

Indexed as

QuarantineCOVID-19HumansPandemicsPublic HealthSARS-CoV-2Social SupportCovid-19isolationquarantinerespiratory pathogensSARS-CoV-2supports

Identifiers

PMID33989440
PMCPMC8209933
OpenAlexW3162982211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.